 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: John J. Moses
Date: 2009-09-01 00:03
Hi All;
Tony Pay and others on this wonderful BBoard, have asked a few questions about the fees various teachers charge for private lessons.
My fees vary from student to student, depending on many factors.
For one, I only accept advanced students (usually College graduates or young professionals). I teach a minimum of three lessons to get at least most of my important ideas across to each student. Most are working young professionals, so my fees are affordable and acceptable.
If a young professional cannot afford my fee, I make an arrangement with that student to pay me at a later date, or pay what we agree they can afford. I try to help all young, talented, dedicated, honest, and needy players.
I love to teach and only work with students who love to learn. I'm not the right teacher for everyone, but all who come to me leave having learned more than they had hoped for.
My students know from the start that they must practice as much as possible, with all the ideas we have discussed, and that every minute counts.
There is never a question or any embarrassment about my fee, as that is discussed fully before we begin. The minute the lesson starts is when I begin charging them for the lesson. We stop when I have discussed fully my ideas for helping their playing improve, and all their questions are answered.
I have had many professionals that come to me not to play, but rather discuss professional problems or equipment issues, so their "lessons" might be quite short. Others are great Sax or Flute players who want to improve their Clarinet chops for doubling. Again, lesson times vary greatly from student to student depending on their needs. I have often given a brief 15 min. lesson, and even given an expensive, but important, 3 hour lesson!
I get paid what any Doctor, Lawyer or well-educated professional receives for their advice. We as musicians, are highly educated, dedicated professionals who deserve to be paid accordingly.
Discuss your payment options with your students. There should be no misconceptions from the start. Payments should be made on time and without any disagreements. Give your students all of your talents and experience, and they will pay you back tenfold.
Good luck and good teaching!
JJM
Légère Artist
Clark W. Fobes Artist
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2009-09-01 11:32
Actually, John Moses wasn't defending himself. He was kindly responding to an email request from me to elaborate on what I thought was a strikingly original and productive way of going about charging for lessons.
Some people had responded to the idea a bit negatively, and the discussion was buried in what became, for a time, a nameless thread; so I'm pleased that he reposted his position.
Tony
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Iceland clarinet
Date: 2009-09-01 11:47
If we are talking about rate over 80$ for a hour lesson then it's something you don't see here in Iceland.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: vin
Date: 2009-09-01 14:11
You don't really see under 100$ in NYC. Your point?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2009-09-01 17:09
Iceland clarinet wrote:
>> If we are talking about rate over 80$ for a hour lesson then it's something you don't see here in Iceland.>>
We're talking about much more than hourly lesson rates. We're talking about a re-evaluation of the whole business of lesson-taking, as well as lesson-giving.
If students were motivated to come to lessons with a particular problem, and an idea of what sort of help they need with that problem, then teaching would be transformed. And it would be transformed even if they turned out to be wrong in their assessment.
Plus, you're too eager to make the calculation to get a figure for an hour. Why not be thinking about what might be possible in twenty minutes, given the right attitudes on the part of both teacher and student?
Well, I suppose it doesn't surprise me.
Tony
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: John J. Moses
Date: 2009-09-01 17:54
Again Tony you are right on, " We're talking about a re-evaluation of the whole business of lesson-taking, as well as lesson-giving."
I believe the standard 1 hour or half hour lesson will become a thing of the past. Let's begin to gear our teaching schedules to the needs of the students and their ability to absorb the concepts of each lesson. Some lessons may be only 15 mins. others perhaps 2 hours. That's why I have chosen to price my private lessons on a per minute basis.
We can further discuss my use of "E-lessons" on the internet, which I find very successful and helpful to many of my far away students.
Cheers,
JJM
Légère Artist
Clark W. Fobes Artist
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sarah Elbaz
Date: 2009-09-01 19:05
Hi John,
I was the one who felt very uncomfortable with pricing the lesson per minute. I still feel the same. It doesn't mean that you are not a good person or teacher. But its clear that your concept of student and teacher is very different than mine.
What if you feel like talking a little with the student at the end of the lesson, do you charge for that too?
You compare yourself to lawyers and doctors. You probably know what doctors say about money: If you can't cure them-- charge them! :-)
Sarah
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mrn
Date: 2009-09-01 19:09
I think this makes a lot of sense, particularly for advanced students, like John teaches. I think of myself, in particular.
I've been playing for 24 years, the first 9 of which I took regular lessons with a professional teacher. These days, I feel like a lot of what needs work in my playing is stuff I'm already aware needs work (there may be plenty more that needs work--but I'm aware of enough stuff to keep me busy practicing for a while ). Because of this (and because I don't play in/for competitions or competitive auditions where I might feel a recurring need for a general critique) I'm not likely to take a lesson with someone unless there's something specific I know I want to work on.
And in that case, if the teacher can explain to me what I need to do in a short space of time, I'd rather adjourn the lesson then, go home and work on it, and come back later after I've had a chance to work on it. From my perspective, that's preferable to using up the better part of a half-hour or hour essentially practicing the thing at the lesson (which works great for kids and beginners, but isn't really necessary for an advanced adult student). If someone can spend 15-20 mins. telling me what I need to do, let me go home and work on it myself, and then give me a short follow-up lesson or two to check my progress, I think that's great.
And speaking from experience in the legal profession, clients like small-increment fractional billing. Nobody wants to pay for a whole hour for something that took 47 minutes to do--that kind of stuff adds up quickly on large projects. When you think of a group of lessons as a multi-stage project in this way (instruction, practice, follow-up, practice, follow-up), small-increment billing makes a lot of sense. Who wants to pay for three hour-long lessons when you can potentially get the same level of professional feedback from three 20 minute lessons? (Not to mention the fact that for adult students, time can be a very scarce commodity.)
E-lessons sound interesting. How do those work?
Post Edited (2009-09-01 19:11)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: OldClarinetGuy
Date: 2009-09-01 19:10
I do not have the pedigree of the responders to this thread to teach to the level that you are talking about, and I do not do it full time.
I teach beginning, intermediate and what I would call high level high school students. There is a point at which I search out teachers for those with exceptional skills--that may be at 10 yrs. old or 16 yrs. old. I believe I am good at what I do and I see my job as different from Mr. Moses or Mr. Palanker.
What I hope to do is to get young musicians excited about playing, keep them advancing and getting them to stay with it. I spend a great deal of time talking about music and playing with them. For the most part, these youngsters are surrounded by mediocre players and band directors who are too overworked to spend time with individual sections much less individual players.
My lessons are 45 minutes long. I spend as much time as I feel is necessary to get across the fundamental or technical things I want to work on or they want to work on, then whatever they are having issues with in school and their solos, and then we play together.
I see fewer kids playing music than ever as I make my way into grade schools and middle schools so maybe my job is the little league baseball coach who gets them to play the game. If I have students who choose not to practice much but still want to play, I don't like it but the fact that they want to continue to play with all the distractions around them still makes it worthwhile.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mrn
Date: 2009-09-01 19:32
OldClarinetGuy wrote:
> I teach beginning, intermediate and what I would call high
> level high school students.
> My lessons are 45 minutes long.
I think fixed-length lessons like these make more sense for younger students (including high school students) and beginners who haven't yet learned how to work independently. Thinking back to my own experiences and watching my daughter learn violin, I see more of a need for teacher-supervised practice during the lesson for younger and less advanced students. Ideally, you'd like as much guided study as possible for beginning students, but financial concerns, time constraints, and attention spans only allow for so much lesson time, so 30 minutes or 45 minutes or what-have-you makes a good compromise.
Younger students and beginners need more reinforcement, and the younger the student the more reinforcement is needed. I think part of the reason for this is that with any instrument there is a lot of new material for a beginner to digest and for younger kids, who have had fewer musical/life experiences to connect what they learn to (they might be just learning to read music while learning the instrument, for example), this problem is compounded--on top of that, younger students generally do not know how to teach themselves, whereas adults are generally more used to teaching themselves new skills.
One of the strategies often employed by people who teach music to very young students using the Suzuki Method is to include the parents in the lesson and teach the parents enough that they can continue the teacher's job at home. Home practice sessions then look very much like lessons, with the parent giving guidance and encouragement and helping to explain/reinforce what the teacher taught. As students mature and learn how to direct their own practice, the parent(s) can gradually step out of the picture and enjoy just being a receptive audience.
So essentially, I see it as a sort of continuum--the youngest and least advanced students need more guided instruction time and/or guided practice time (relative to their level of independent practice) and more mature and advanced students need less instruction and more independent practice time.
Post Edited (2009-09-01 19:48)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
